Please support S.B. 710
As a resident of California, I am writing to urge you to support S.B. 710. Suppressors are legal to own in 42 states, 40 of which allow their use while hunting. They have been federally regulated since the passage of the National Firearms Act of 1934. In order to purchase a suppressor, prospective buyers must live in a state where suppressors are legal, send in an application including fingerprints and passport photos to the ATF, pay a $200 transfer tax, notify their local Chief Law Enforcement Officer (CLEO), and wait for ATF to process the application. Suppressors are one of the most misunderstood tools in existence. The majority of Americans believe that suppressors fully silence the noise of a gunshot. This notion is unequivocally false. The terms “silencer” and “suppressor” refer to the same thing – a muffler for a firearm. It is important to note that nothing can actually silence the noise of a gunshot. Physics will not allow it, as there are too many variables that suppressors do not affect. In reality, suppressors work in the same manner as mufflers on cars, which function by trapping hot expanding gasses and allowing them to slowly cool, thereby reducing the noise to safer levels. On average, suppressors reduce the noise of a gunshot by 20 – 35 decibels (dB), roughly the same sound reduction as earplugs or earmuffs. Even the most effective suppressors on the market, on the smallest and quietest calibers, like .22 LR, reduce the peak sound level of a gunshot to around 110 – 120 decibels. To put that in perspective, according to the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH), that is as loud as a jackhammer (110 dB) or an ambulance siren (120 dB). From a hearing conservation perspective, according to Dr. William W. Clark, the current Director of the Washington University School of Medicine’s Program in Audiology and Communication Sciences, “the most serious threat to hearing comes from recreational hunting or target shooting”. (1) This is in large part due to the fact that many people choose not to use traditional hearing protection devices like earplugs and earmuffs. Multiple studies have found that between 70 to 80% of hunters never wear earplugs or earmuffs, and nearly half of all target shooters don't consistently wear traditional hearing protection.(2,3) Thus, it should come as no surprise that for every five years of hunting, hunters become seven percent more likely to experience high frequency hearing loss.(4) In a 2011 study of California shooting ranges, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) stated, “the only potentially effective noise control method to reduce students’ or instructors’ noise exposure from gunfire is through the use of noise suppressors that can be attached to the end of the gun barrel. However, some states do not permit civilians to use suppressors on firearms.” (5) California is one such state. I urge you to support S.B. 710 as similar legislation in other states has received bipartisan support. In the past three years, three Democratic Governors have signed standalone pro-suppressor bills into law - Gov. Steve Bullock (MT) in 2015, Gov. Peter Shumlin (VT) in 2015, and Gov. Maggie Hassan (NH) in 2016. One of the primary reasons for such widespread bipartisan support is because the use of suppressors by criminals is virtually nonexistent. According to a white paper titled “Options to Reduce or Modify Firearms Regulations”, by Ronald Turk, Associate Deputy Director and Chief Operating Officer of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF), “silencers are very rarely used in criminal shootings. Given the lack of criminality associated with silencers, it is reasonable to conclude that they should not be viewed as a threat to public safety”. Furthermore, criminals know that using a suppressor in the commission of a crime will carry stiff State and Federal penalties that will remain even with the passage of this legislation. By supporting S.B. 710, you are doing your part to give sportsmen and women in California the option to use suppressors, ensuring that future generations will no longer have to choose between their passion and their hearing. 1) Clark WW. (1991) Noise exposure from leisure activities: a review. J Acoust Soc Am 90(1):175–181. 2) Wagner A, Stewart M, Lehman ME. (2006) Risk patterns and shooting habits of recreational firearm users. In: Abstracts of the National Hearing Conservation Association Annual Conference 2006, Tampa, Florida. NHCA Spectrum 23(Suppl. 1):28. 3) Stewart M, Foley L, Lehman ME, Gerlach A. (2011) Risks Faced by Recreational Firearm Users. Audiology Today, March-April:38–52. 4) Chen L, Brueck SE. (2011) Noise and Lead Exposures at an Outdoor Firing Range ─ California. Health Hazard Evaluation Report HETA 2011-0069-3140:5. 5) Brueck SE, Kardous CA, Oza A, Murphy WJ. (2014) Measurement of Exposure to Impulsive Noise at Indoor and Outdoor Firing Ranges during Tactical Training Exercises. Health Hazard Evaluation Report HETA 2013-0124-3208:14.
Thank you for taking action!
Sign with Facebook
Or sign with email
First & Last Name
Email
please leave blank
Address
City
Zip